Einstein and the Cosmic Man

[Dubious]

I have attempted to verify the truths of my beliefs through efforts to consciously “know thyself.” What efforts have you made to verify the truth of your denial of any quality of consciousness greater than yourself?

Since I can't make sense of most of your gobbledygook, impenetrable to reason not to mention all the distortions you apply to others - nearly as exceptional as those of IC - all I can say is have fun "knowing yourself". There certainly is no pleasure or insight to be gleaned in knowing you.

I wonder are there any down to earth sensible theists still around or have they gone extinct??

[Dontaskme]

The real reality has no concept of itself...this is not-knowing knowing. ...

Not what I asked, what I asked waas given what you say how do you know there is a 'real' reality?

The same way you can know you have a body..or you can know it's raining today, things are known in the experience. There is no one having an experience, there is only the experience.

There has to be a real impersonal unchanging ground of all being, an unbroken spacetime continuum to exist for an experience to be appear. Like a container of contents...The personal I doesn't know that, the personal I is an appearance in it, known, by the impersonal observer of that...aka the unknown knowing known.

All knowing is sourced in not-knowing.

Meaningless.

True, as true life doesn't lay claim or blame or fame to it's existence, in a nutshell it's basically meaningless.

But, the consciousness that is expressed as and through the human mind body mechanism...appears to form an energetic dynamic whereby it is able to conceptualise it's reality, it's a purely biological function of the brain observed by the open space of empty conscious awareness. In other words, any meaning has been artificially imputed into the experience of being. Conceptualisation has created meaning where there is none in reality as observed/known in the experience of awareness experiencing itself as and through the concept I am a human body. A shift has taken place, a programming of sorts appear to the brain and voilà a personal identity is born, that claims it is the body, all purely fictional of course, because it's only a concept. No one owns a body, there is only conscious awareness having a human body experience. What is awareness?..I've no idea, I am it.

The above is my opinion only, and has been realised through years and years of self study and introspection into the nature of the sense of believing there is a separate identified self called ''me''

Unless people have studied this subject for them self, they will have no idea what is being discussed here. All I'm doing is showing something, it is up to people to look or not, but no one is expected to believe in what is written here in my posts...it's a conceptualised experiential exploration into the truth of beingness being a human - it is a returning to the pure self of being, the end of suffering for the identified self, and the final letting go of that identified self to merge with real self, where there is no more attachment to the outcome of naturally occurring events of life including loss and gain, pain and pleasure, sickness and health, life or death.



.

[Dontaskme]

I have attempted to verify the truths of my beliefs through efforts to consciously “know thyself.” What efforts have you made to verify the truth of your denial of any quality of consciousness greater than yourself?

Since I can't make sense of most of your gobbledygook, impenetrable to reason not to mention all the distortions you apply to others - nearly as exceptional as those of IC - all I can say is have fun "knowing yourself". There certainly is no pleasure or insight to be gleaned in knowing you.

I wonder are there any down to earth sensible theists still around or have they gone extinct??

Only when you ''know yourself'' will you know Nick ...and other 'sensible theists' what ever they are supposed to mean.

When you know yourself truly, absent of all bias, prejudice and resentment or attachment to other peoples ideas about both themselves and you ...only then will all your projections of what you believe to be true about others will stop, that is the true indication that you truly do ''know yourself''... You see, these projected beliefs about others are only inside of you..and not others. They are the residue of collective negative energies that have not yet left your body..or been released by you by using your own efforts to self inquire into the true nature of self and other....and your inability to deal with them cause you to project them at others....in essence you have no idea or knowing of anything outside your own mind except your own interpretation based on what you are, what you think and believe.

Deconstruct your own poisoned mind, instead of expecting other people to swallow it.

.

[Dubious]

I have attempted to verify the truths of my beliefs through efforts to consciously “know thyself.” What efforts have you made to verify the truth of your denial of any quality of consciousness greater than yourself?

Since I can't make sense of most of your gobbledygook, impenetrable to reason not to mention all the distortions you apply to others - nearly as exceptional as those of IC - all I can say is have fun "knowing yourself". There certainly is no pleasure or insight to be gleaned in knowing you.

I wonder are there any down to earth sensible theists still around or have they gone extinct??

Only when you ''know yourself'' will you know Nick ...and other 'sensible theists' what ever they are supposed to mean.

When you know yourself truly, absent of all bias, prejudice and resentment or attachment to other peoples ideas about both themselves and you ...only then will all your projections of what you believe to be true about others will stop, that is the true indication that you truly do ''know yourself''... You see, these projected beliefs about others are only inside of you..and not others. They are the residue of collective negative energies that have not yet left your body..or been released by you by using your own efforts to self inquire into the true nature of self and other....and your inability to deal with them cause you to project them at others....in essence you have no idea or knowing of anything outside your own mind except your own interpretation based on what you are, what you think and believe.

Deconstruct your own poisoned mind, instead of expecting other people to swallow it.

If I were you, Nick, or IC, knowing myself would not be the most desirable option. In fact I would consider such a consummation devoutly to be avoided. There are times when ignorance is bliss after all! Knowing oneself can have a nasty side-effect. It seems none of you know yourselves well enough yet to have discovered it! Strange, because it's clear to the rest of us.

[Belinda]

Dubious wrote:

If I were you, Nick, or IC, knowing myself would not be the most desirable option. In fact I would consider such a consummation devoutly to be avoided. There are times when ignorance is bliss after all! Knowing oneself can have a nasty side-effect. It seems none of you know yourselves well enough yet to have discovered it! Strange, because it's clear to the rest of us.

Are you conflating knowing yourself with introspecting? Introspection is a bad thing to do when the vitality is low , when you are tired or ill. Otherwise for a limited and self disciplined duration it's good for one.I think.

Dointaskme, and Nick, fail to know themselves in the sense of failing to discuss alternatives to their favourite stances.

Immanuel Can does in fact discuss an alternatives to his theism and has often done so with me. IC can dissect ideas but the other two don't do so. For this reason he is a quite good spokesman for theism despite his sarcasms, which are probably a form of self defence. The other two don't make themselves vulnerable at all but hide behind their fallacious cliches.

[Walker]

Nothing does not own any thing ..it is everything.

... nothing is everything?

Why not just howl.

[Nick_A]

Why is atheism so closed minded and yet believe itself open minded? Atheists here deny that I am not a theist. Why is this so? Rabbi Wolpe sheds some light on the subject.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-dav ... 33662.html

In the past when I have debated noted atheists — Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and others — the audience was heavily weighted toward my opponents. That makes sense. Each of these men — like Dawkins, Dennett and others — brings with them a large following. But why seek out a religious site solely to insult religion? I wondered: Why are atheists so angry?

Here are four reasons, none exclusive of the others:

1. Atheists genuinely resent the evil that religion has done. No one can seriously deny that religion has been guilty of wickedness in this world and has provided cover for wickedness. I refer not only to abusers who hide under the cloak of clergy, but religious persecutions, the stifling of speech and dissent, the mistreatment of women — the crimes are legion. While as a believer I think there is much more to be said about this topic, it is certainly reasonable for people to be angry at religion for its abuses, particularly people who have themselves been victims.

2. They are convinced that religion is a fairy tale made up of whole cloth that impedes science/progress/rational thought. No avalanche of counterexamples, from noted scientists who are believers to the way in which the scientific method has flourished in the monotheistic west (as opposed to say, the non-monotheistic eastern societies) will serve to dissuade. That which is understood to have happened to Galileo is all, apparently, one needs to know.

3. Here is where I make my bid for more obloquy to be visited on my head. There is an arrogant unwillingness to engage with religion’s serious thinkers. Too many atheists assume that a couple of insults will substitute for argument. They suffer from the incredulity of those who cannot believe anyone would disagree. It reminds me of the most self-assured of the faithful, who suffer the same intellectual imperialism. “I am right,” a statement we all identify with from time to time, becomes “therefore you are stupid for disagreeing.” A disagreeable sentiment, to say the least. And a narrow, thoughtless one, to boot.

4. Finally, I will go so far as to say that there is sometimes in the atheist a want of wonder. In a world in which so much is still not understood, in which multiple universes are possible, in which we have not pierced the mystery of consciousness, to discount the supernatural is to lack the openness to mystery that should be a human hallmark. There is so much we do not know. Religious people too should acknowledge this truth. Epistemological humility — the acknowledgment that we are at the very first baby steps of understanding — is far wiser than arrogance on either side. After all, we comprehend with our brains, and who knows how limited are our only organs of understanding?

These atheists are bigoted against religion in the same way that some are prejudiced against blacks. They create a collective based on imagination and separate incidents. Atheists are unaware that religion consists of many levels of quality and like any form of bigotry, is closed to qualitative discrimination. The belief that religion by definition reflects fantasy provides an air of superiority for the atheist and closes the mind to the experience of wonder as opposed to curiousity.

Ideas Einstein presents are really introductory baby steps to evolving towards a human conscious perspective. Even at this level they are repulsive and will be rejected by dominant secularism. I don't see how it can change. When blind belief is met with blind denial what can be expected other than the status quo and the continuance of dominant cave life?

[Nick_A]

DaM, is "I Am" the goal of human conscious evolution or is the goal not to exist? Here is an article on Jacob Needleman's book "I am not I"

https://www.brainpickings.org/2016/10/1 ... needleman/

Perhaps on another thread we can discuss what I Am really means as a human potential as opposed the reality that "we are not?" IMO, recognition of the human condition is essential for evolving towards a human as opposed to justifying a cave perspective.

[Harbal]

Why is this so? Rabbit Wolpe sheds some light on the subject.......

Although the opinion of a small furry animal is probably preferable to yours it is still not necessarily of interest to anyone.

[Harbal]

Perhaps on another thread we can discuss what I Am

Oh yes, I'm looking forward to that one.

[Dontaskme]

DaM, is "I Am" the goal of human conscious evolution or is the goal not to exist? Here is an article on Jacob Needleman's book "I am not I"

https://www.brainpickings.org/2016/10/1 ... needleman/

Perhaps on another thread we can discuss what I Am really means as a human potential as opposed the reality that "we are not?" IMO, recognition of the human condition is essential for evolving towards a human as opposed to justifying a cave perspective.

Yes, 'I Am' is the goal of human conscious evolution and the meaning of life in general ..it is only through evolution that the source of all that is can get to know itself as and through the many facets of itself... The whole in part as a separate identity is this life experiencing...until it is finally ready to reconnect to the source of I AM

It's like the diamond has many facets of it's one self, but the whole self cannot experience itself as a whole 3D object all at once...it has to appear as the many facets of itself, and not until it does that can it reconcile as to who or what it actually really is.

The veil is here for a purpose ..and we can discuss that on another thread if you want.


.

[Harbal]

It's like the diamond has many facets of it's one self, but the whole self cannot experience itself as a whole 3D object all at once...it has to appear as the many facets of itself, and not until it does that can it reconcile as to who or what it actually really is.

Diamonds are forever so it's got plenty of time to figure it out.

[Nick_A]

Why is this so? Rabbit Wolpe sheds some light on the subject.......

Although the opinion of a small furry animal is probably preferable to yours it is still not necessarily of interest to anyone.

You must be anti-semitic. First you make fun of the Rabbi's title and then you write that his ideas are not of interest to anyone. Just another example of secular bigotry.

[Greta]

1. Atheists genuinely resent the evil that religion has done.

I am not an atheist but the rabbi is correct. This accounts for most of the problem that the non religious have with the religious, especially when there is still widespread disbelief of church abuses.

2. They are convinced that religion is a fairy tale made up of whole cloth that impedes science/progress/rational thought.

Correct. This accounts for more or less the rest of the objections. Many theists believe an extraordinary amount of obvious utter nonsense, eg. Noah's ark.

To theists who don't hold crazy beliefs - those who harm you most are not atheists but extreme types who make you look like deluded idiots.

3. Here is where I make my bid for more obloquy to be visited on my head. There is an arrogant unwillingness to engage with religion’s serious thinkers.

I have tried and did encounter a theist who was a truly challenging, serious thinker. Totally devout but also extremely nice and responsive to reason - I was most impressed. A couple more were pretty shaky in their logic but had some interesting ideas. Most, though, are far from serious thinkers, just theist warriors.

4. Finally, I will go so far as to say that there is sometimes in the atheist a want of wonder.

This is exactly what the non religious think of the religious. Many non religious are in awe of nature and are surprised at most theists' obvious lack of curiosity in what is the bedrock of our being.

Philosophers make the same mistake, considering humanity to be the totality of what matters, a shallow notion that ignores the journey of nature that resulted in abstract intelligence and is thus intrinsically shallow.

As Douglas Adams noted:

Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?

These atheists are bigoted against religion in the same way that some are prejudiced against blacks.

Do you mean the kind of bigotry that might lead leads a fanatical theist to start long threads to vent hatred against a group - let's just say the theist really, really hates "secularists" and "atheists"?

The kind of prejudice where a bigot might level every possible accusation of mental, emotional and philosophical dysfunction at secularists? Perhaps the kind of bigotry that results in every secular member attempting to engage being treated with utter contempt?

Do you mean that kind of bigotry?

Or is it the kind of bigotry where theists are banned from forums for calling moderators "liars" (amongst other things) and then blame their banning on their theism rather than arrogant rudeness?

[Harbal]

You must be anti-semitic.

I see you don't mind being PC when it suits you.

First you make fun of the Rabbi's title and then you write that his ideas are not of interest to anyone.

It's just my way of achieving spiritual fulfillment, you should be the last person to condemn me for that.

Just another example of secular bigotry.

Well if "cute blondes" are fair game for disparagement I can't really see why Rabbis are not.